Posted on 01/27/2005 2:08:34 AM PST by bellevuesbest
Why don't you preview your replies before you post them Einstein? Buenos noches and tell PN good night for the rest of us, okay?
While this collection is not as accurate in its attributions as the others
Objective readers will agree that, in light of the website's own disclaimer, the onus is on you to prove it is accurate.
Because this is an informal discussion board, not a letter to the editor. Usually I let it stand - but in this instance I corrected the emphasis added for your benefit, knowing that you would be confused without it.
Whats next? You going to flame me for spelling errors? [yawn]
http://www.aol.bartleby.com/66/17/42617.html
I believe it is from Chapter 14 of one of your favorite books: "What I Saw At the Revolution."
She campaigned for the president.
She is still on our side, but she is wrong on this one.
People can be wrong and still on the right side.
Edited by Robert Andrews, Mary Biggs, and Michael Seidel
The 65,000 essential quotations that constitute this authoritative collection represent the research of 154 experts. Entries from more than 5,000 authors and speakers are multiply classified into 6,500 subjects.
Another observation by Miss Noonan about Ronald Reagan from near the end of Chapter 14 of "What I Saw At The Revolution." Sorry to say, I do not have a link but I do have the reference. Seems like Miss Noonan thought of Ronaldus Magnus as some sort of hot air balloon. Sort think that Noonan's powers of observation are not the most reliable.
bttt
http://www.aol.bartleby.com/66/17/42617.html
NUMBER: 42617
QUOTATION: The battle for the mind of Ronald Reagan was like the trench warfare of World War I: never have so many fought so hard for such barren terrain.
ATTRIBUTION: Peggy Noonan (b. 1950), U.S. author, presidential speechwriter. What I Saw at the Revolution, ch. 14 (1990).
My, my I am shocked. Surely she did not believe this..
Noonan worked as a special assistant and speechwriter to Reagan, 1984-1988.
That was never a plan that the American people were informed of before the invasion. Quite the contrary - - - we were told the invasion, once Saddam was removed, would yield a peaceful and stable nation by now. We were told we were liberating Iraqis, not condeming their country to be a chaotic battle zone of international terrorists (which you claim was the plan).
Yuck. Where's the humility? She sure thought Bush didn't show enough. Where's hers?
ROTFL!
That was my considered response to her first column on the inaugural speech. It didn't read like a hasty reaction or a careless mistake or a fit of uncontrolled pique. It read like a deliberate and malicious attack calculated to give ammunition to Bush's enemies.
No doubt she has seen the critical responses, including Jody Bottum's excellent piece. Now she comes back with this. It's nervous, defensive, and not very well written, but it confirms that she has joined the self-annointed "Realpolitik" crowd.
It's too bad, because although she's written an occasional bad piece before, I've always been one of her admirers. Come to think of it, I used to admire Bill Kristol, too.
Perfect.
She is one of those commentators who are so full of self importance that they accentuate each and every syllable they speak so that we will be sure to absorb the full importance of it. Others who do this are Catherine Crier and Barbara Simpson (of KSFO Radio).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.